Re: Euphoria features
On Sat, 13 Nov 1999 08:37:33 -0500, Irv Mullins <irv at ELLIJAY.COM> wrote:
>From: Everett Williams <rett at GVTC.COM>
>Subject: Re: Euphoria features
><snip Jason's type check routine>
>
>> And how is this type of thing going to describe the umpty hundred bit
>> and
>> byte flags in the average message header, no matter the protocol. They
>> have to be literally unpacked one by one and then moved into a different
>> sequence or atom before they can be intelligently maneuvered. And
>> since the data stream is dynamic, and treacherous, I really need for
>> type checking to stay on. Can you spell Methuselah...the guy whose
>> age you will approach while all this gets done.
>
>It appears that at least two people are laboring under a misconception
>of exactly what type() does.
>
>Bear in mind that a type() failure can _only_ cause an immediate abend. Very
>useful when debugging, but worse than useless in a production program.
>Surely I don't have to explain this further.
>
>If type() could modify the passed parameter according to some rules you set
>up, e.g: ask the clumsy typist to try again, it would be much more useful.
>If it were faster, that wouldn't hurt either.
>
>Irv
I stand corrected. I must have been thinking of a real world where error
recovery is possible. Still, one can always hope 
And by the way, your
age is showing. I haven't "heard" anyone use the term "abend" since I
worked my last dump on an IBM mainframe. Seems like in COBOL
programs, D37s' and E37's were the most common. Been a long time.
Working failure codes on PC's is a non-rewarding process, since I have
access to so little of the object code, much less the source.
Everett L.(Rett) Williams
rett at gvtc.com
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
